Larceny Flashcards
What does Illich v The Queen say about Larceny?
It provides the common law definition for the offence.
What are the 8 proofs of Larceny as made out in Illich v The Queen?
(1) Property charged must be the subject of larceny at common law.
(2) Property belongs to another
(3) Taking of the property (trespass)
(4) Carried away
(5) Taking without consent
(6) Waking without claim of right
(7) Taking with the intent to permanently deprive
(8) Taking was dishonestly
Is Real property subject to larceny?
No real property cannot be moved therefore cannot be subject to larceny.
What does s.139 fix in relation to larceny?
It allows for anything that has been severed or broken from a building and steals it.
What does s.140 fix in relation to larceny?
It allows for anything that is taken from land, ie plants to be subject of larceny.
How is tangible property defined?
The property must have physical substance, something that can be taken hold of and carried away.
How do you formulate a charge of larceny for cash?
It relates to the plastic notes or metal coins, ie 10 x $20 notes, not $200.
What does R v Mcdonald say in relation to lost property?
The finder’s belief is to be inferred by what he does do or what he does not do.And that those actions might be what a reasonably honest person would do.
What does Ellis v Lawson say about unknown owner?
If the ownership of the property is unknown the fact must be proved that the identity is unknown.
What does R v Anic say about stealing illegal property?
Stealing of property that is unlawful to posse still constitutes an offence.
What does R v Riley say about trespass (taking) of property?
The unaware trespass of the property with a later conversion is the doctrine of continuing trespass and constitutes larceny. ie accidentally taking something belonging to another then realizing and deciding to keep it.
Define Claim or Right?
Must be genuinely honest.
Does not matter if it is well founded.
Does not have to be reasonable.
Must be more the coloured pretense.
Does claim of right extend to property of equal value?
Yes, R v Fuge.
